Re: Is gtk4 support in libnma still EXPERIMENTAL?

[Michael Biebl <biebl debian org>]

Am 13.03.22 um 12:46 schrieb Thomas Haller:
> On Sat, 2022-03-12 at 21:55 +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:

> > ./usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/girepository-1.0/NMA4-1.0.typelib
> > ./usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libnma-gtk4.so
> > ./usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libnma-gtk4.so.0.0.0
> > ./usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/pkgconfig/libnma-gtk4.pc
> > ./usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libnma-gtk4.so.0
> > ./usr/share/vala/vapi/libnma-gtk4.vapi
> > ./usr/share/vala/vapi/libnma-gtk4.deps
> > ./usr/share/gir-1.0/NMA4-1.0.gir
>
>
> yes. I think it's fine. is there a problem?
>
> You cannot load gtk3 and gtk4 in the same application, and
> consequently, you cannot load libnma.so (gtk3) and libnma-gtk4
> together.
>
> libnma is a GUI library based on GTK. It seems not unreasonable that
> the GTK version is part of the library name -- in particular, as there
> might come GTK5 in the future.
>
> These are really two different libraries (with very similar API and the
> same underlying sources).

I see the necessity and maybe this is just bike shedding on my side but 
I'd personally prefer the gtk part being dropped, so the soname becomes 
libnma-4.so.0
And correspondingly libnma-4.pc (libnma4.pc would be fine as well).

Or do we have some prior art where the gtkX string is encoded in the 
library soname?

I also find it a bit inconsistent that the gobject instrospection files 
do not have GTK string embedded.

Regards,
Michael

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature